On 8/10/2026 at 9:15 AM, VBF said:

I absolutely agree with you there, but look at my post above where I already mentioned that scanning for explosives is different from "general" scanning.

To quote myself "I understand that all luggage might be scanned for explosives of course - this from USA https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/factsheets/technology "

Personally, I really couldn't care less if a few numpties have smuggled drugs, or illicit booze, cigarettes etc aboard. If they get caught, serves them right, but explosives are obviously a whole different matter. These days, even power banks are rightly banned in hold luggage - they could potentially cause a fire that creates a major disaster and I'm sure I don't need to post those widely discussed rules .

If they check for bombs with x+rays anyway then why not check for drugs simultaneously?

1 hour ago, pacovl46 said:

If they check for bombs with x+rays anyway then why not check for drugs simultaneously?

Why don't you read the link I posted - it's not automatically the same technology.

4 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

I always paid for all my drugs myself, from the money I earned. I had a very well paid job and never needed to resort to crime, If they Legalised all drugs now, crime would probably be halved overnight. .

No argument from me, but think about your post. You have basically stated half the crime is committed by drug addicts, which is the point I am making.

Lite sentences or non custodial sentences for drug addicts / dealers / trafficker equals more crime.

4 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

Murderers Rapists and Pedo's will also be released early ,

Yes, an absolute disgrace.

4 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

The UK is already lawless and the police are already having to "prioritise"who they target, that's why people are getting arrested for "hurty words" I doubt those people will be released early

Well, the UK has lost control of the borders. It appears they are now losing control of the judicial system. The UK is a ticking time bomb. It will kick off there one day.

On 8/10/2026 at 1:00 PM, KhunHeineken said:

A non-custodial sentence would set a precedent, and give the green light for many others to try to smuggle drugs into the UK.

If the UK judicial system is unable to have the punishment fit the crime, the crime rate is going to explode.

It's going to get a lot worse.

Looking at the sentencing guidelines it's possible it might warrant a non custodial decision but I don't know all the facts. Releasing certain offenders early might make space for someone like this woman to at least serve some time.

In the end, if the spaces aren't there, offenders can't be placed in them, regardless of what we or the government think.

17 hours ago, kimamey said:

Looking at the sentencing guidelines it's possible it might warrant a non custodial decision but I don't know all the facts. Releasing certain offenders early might make space for someone like this woman to at least serve some time.

In the end, if the spaces aren't there, offenders can't be placed in them, regardless of what we or the government think.

The amount of accommodation is the issue. Obviously, they need to increase capacity. As what capacity exists slowly fills up with violent criminals, it will become a free for all for non violent criminal, such as fraudsters.

It amazes me that an international drug trafficker can even be considered for a non custodial sentence.

As I said, if she is not sent to prison, it will set a dangerous precedent. The UK has already lost control of its boarders for illegal immigrants. The next will be drug international traffickers.